To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 23303
23302  |  23304
Subject: 
Re: The Great Ball Contraption
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:01:48 GMT
Viewed: 
7494 times
  
In lugnet.robotics, Steve Hassenplug wrote:
At this point, we're not interested in making the standard more complex,
and
increasing the difficulty of setting it up, when it really doesn't add any
functionality to the whole contraption.

Well, perhaps some things need more complexity, although I would agree a
standard anyone can use is preferable.  The big challenge is getting the
degree of complexity as best you can for all parties which will be involved.

Geoffrey Hyde


Is there something that a module builder can not do because the standard is too simple?

Steve

Not to oversimplify, but I mean if the 'standard' for the ball contraption is 32
studs from the front of the hopper to the back edge of the baseplate, and thus I
personally would probably grab a 32 x 32 stud baseplate to build on, thus the
'in' hopper would be in the bottom left hand corner anyway, wouldn't my module,
by its very nature, be able to be placed 'in line' with the other ones, or 90
degrees, placing the hopper in the same location?

I think that making 90 degree turns (only to the right) would be able to be done
on many modules, just the way they are--phenominal ASCII graphix below!

XXXXXXXXXXYYYYYYYYYY
X        XY        Y
X        XY        Y
X        XY        Y
X        XY        Y
OOO      XOOO      YOOO
O O      XO O      YO O
OOOXXXXXXXOOOYYYYYYYOOO


XXXXXXXXXX
X        X
X        X
X        X
X        X
OOO      XOOOYYYYYYY
O O      XO O      Y
OOOXXXXXXXOOO      Y
          Y        Y
          Y        Y
          Y        Y
          Y        Y
          YYYYYYYYYY
          OOO
          O O
          OOO


X-Module 1
Y-Module 2
O-Input/Output Bin

See, if you leave both 'outer edges' of the bin open, both orientations work

But maybe I'm missing something.

Dave K



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: The Great Ball Contraption
 
news-gateway@lugnet.com wrote on 01/10/2005 10:01:48 AM: (...) thus the (...) module, (...) or 90 (...) That assumes that there is nothing in front of the hopper. There is nothing to say that you are limited to a module 32 studs deep. If you choose (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: The Great Ball Contraption
 
(...) Is there something that a module builder can not do because the standard is too simple? Steve (19 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)

94 Messages in This Thread:



































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR